From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-lj1-f178.google.com (mail-lj1-f178.google.com [209.85.208.178]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE68C249F4 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 2023 16:10:02 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="JyiCIe+r" Received: by mail-lj1-f178.google.com with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2c9c03dac8aso8785921fa.0 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 2023 08:10:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1701274201; x=1701879001; darn=lists.linux.dev; h=mime-version:user-agent:content-transfer-encoding:references :in-reply-to:date:cc:to:from:subject:message-id:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=0gVwtVEOP0F6ww9pRY3J7jQpFumQUStnI1asdXzYxfo=; b=JyiCIe+robjMS/YO0Jje9TNtD/5D8OEj8SyGxTZNpXRag2jih7x0nmXH3uc0y2XPrK uzMKoFKgpC5oF+EPd5ELWynkCKnOmCWnf9cGPUB8zUcBayHo8CfzEIwUa5uFpS1dy6nW AEXe8cRlIGNPGbJlXRLaSwQjZJREoo9uorODYz5n0F+WlXlo4wVgkcrGzUtcJinFpXGn RxQNjx+b6Ng5Sc6dBN+cVahorjLxc2Rgt7jvcUUaFk5BDoNkwsM1VrgC2K/9SJbBdua4 D6IRH84WRjVlZZRxIcZ8S8ORyT52DU5vEvN532C5MxL5L8xNTafELNKA+diw5wkNwp+8 6yrg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1701274201; x=1701879001; h=mime-version:user-agent:content-transfer-encoding:references :in-reply-to:date:cc:to:from:subject:message-id:x-gm-message-state :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=0gVwtVEOP0F6ww9pRY3J7jQpFumQUStnI1asdXzYxfo=; b=rAkIPjM2qExz4iWCtPe5gPXutOVNdzjqgTpqS91y238h4tdhL4WSDSdusU0jFHUfak rXok0E15vnyt16ZatDrNW4twxuVTSf/mFRbFgKoTFL4Nd5WHfhP5vaATJnkpqQtkCYt6 B6SxBITOZadf1hPIfAvYAH6TDuvhLno8c/9ZJKcTQGSs95Fg79fviUN96ZzxY1TBiMgv KOZE48dQr12vKZKxdhmCD3x9HO8TJWYvpSm0T/PTwYGibL6kYr20gRRiVtO6gUFqVTC7 SqMpnc7Hw88s7wKmV0nyBVfyqlVX9aCID53b/8bZYlcWb+TENuKqOj0BUTBU18P6ZBQf nLKA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwrlJLovqbYq/m1Q2iDhmFezldCjgTd5TvX9Co5aZhRMyp1mhtc +0DAKtmFBW7FB9/EyM25tg8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFNqCQICTcgkfZf93dr7jAtb3Xl5vrjI3kQ4p2Rj/gReXYF32JunlQQf7VmLrKGPTXBU/NW6A== X-Received: by 2002:a05:651c:1a06:b0:2c9:9953:30ec with SMTP id by6-20020a05651c1a0600b002c9995330ecmr11490543ljb.20.1701274200474; Wed, 29 Nov 2023 08:10:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2001:a61:3456:4e01:6ae:b55a:bd1d:57fc? ([2001:a61:3456:4e01:6ae:b55a:bd1d:57fc]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id cr18-20020a05600004f200b0033304787251sm7876350wrb.17.2023.11.29.08.09.59 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 29 Nov 2023 08:10:00 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3e709b197c6131cc9bbc324dc19f007de5914ad5.camel@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] hwmon: ltc4282: add support for the LTC4282 chip From: Nuno =?ISO-8859-1?Q?S=E1?= To: Guenter Roeck , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Andy Shevchenko Cc: kernel test robot , Nuno Sa via B4 Relay , linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev, Jean Delvare , Rob Herring , Conor Dooley , Jonathan Corbet , Bartosz Golaszewski , Linus Walleij Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2023 17:09:59 +0100 In-Reply-To: <53ce752e-4292-479e-8c40-2a96f4c692dc@roeck-us.net> References: <20231124-ltc4282-support-v2-2-952bf926f83c@analog.com> <202311250548.lUn3bm1A-lkp@intel.com> <76957975-56e7-489e-9c79-086b6c1ffe89@kernel.org> <53ce752e-4292-479e-8c40-2a96f4c692dc@roeck-us.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.48.4 (3.48.4-1.fc38) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 On Wed, 2023-11-29 at 06:47 -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On 11/29/23 00:35, Nuno S=C3=A1 wrote: > [ ... ] >=20 > >=20 > > For the record, I do care about the code I submit and missing 'static' = is quite > > embarrassing, yes. The only reason why I still dind't send the v3 fixin= g that is > > because I'm giving more time to see if you can review some of the other= changes. > > I'm > > pretty sure I'll be asked to change more things in v2 (as stated in the= cover, > > there > > are still some shady things in the driver). > >=20 >=20 > NP, but you (and others) will have to accept that your patches end up at = the end > of my lowest-priority review queue if 0-day or checkpatch or builds with = W=3D1 > end up reporting problems. My time is limited, and I am extremely wary of= having > to keep telling people to run checkpatch or builds with W=3D1. >=20 > Guenter >=20 Hmm I see... So I might just send a v3 with the feedback I got so far plus = getting 0- day fixed. That way, I might get out of the lowest-priority queue :) - Nuno S=C3=A1